Lately, I’ve been thinking about Thom Yorke as a musical version of Steven Soderbergh: An insanely gifted popular entertainer who’s come to think of himself as a trickster auteur type, someone who will concoct dizzily difficult artistic scenarios for himself and then solve his own puzzles with breathtaking ease. The thing about Soderbergh is that even when he’s not in Erin Brockovitch/Ocean’s Eleven blockbuster-entertainment mode, even when he’s pretending to be difficult, is that his movies tend to have gratifying, easily understood emotional arcs. He can fill his movies with nonprofessional actors or bizarre filmmaking flourishes, but you still feel like you’re in the hands of a master entertainer, not a challenging visionary. Yorke has his own blockbuster-entertainer mode, too; when they feel like being that, Radiohead are still probably the best arena rock band currently working. But even when he’s linking with Burial or Flying Lotus, Yorke’s voice has an ineffable float to it, something recognizable to anyone who’s ever enjoyed “Paranoid Android” or “Optimistic” or maybe even “Creep.” On AMOK, the debut full-length from his newish band Atoms For Peace, Yorke devises all sorts of traps for that voice: Endlessly twitchy rhythmic beds, hall-of-mirrors synth-blips, time-signatures too convoluted for a roomful of metronomes to chart. At times, he sounds like he’s singing for a warm, low-tech version of Autechre. But that voice always hovers over everything, triumphantly soothing, offering an uncomplicated form of beauty that ultimately overshadows everything else.

If I wanted to stretch things a bit too far, I’d say that Flea, maintaining bass duties in Atoms For Peace, is Yorke’s equivalent to Channing Tatum: A known-to-the-masses boldface name, frequently seen in his underwear and widely believed to be stupid, who turns out to be capable of great work when he’s paired up with the right auteur. But that parallel doesn’t really work — not because it leaves you wondering whether Blood Sugar Sex Magik is the first Step Up movie but because Flea, at least here, is a relatively anonymous presence. Atoms For Peace is a staggering, fascinating collection of musicians: Flea, Radiohead buddy Nigel Godrich, star alt-rock session drummer Joey Waronker, unknown-quantity percussionist Mauro Refosco. In the end, though, they don’t sound like a band. Yorke recruited all of them in the first place so that they could stand onstage behind him and play the intricately layered, inward-looking backing tracks that made up his solo album The Eraser. And on AMOK, to the extent that they sound like flesh-and-blood musicians at all, they sound like people who would be really good at playing The Eraser. In the rare moment when you can pick the individual moments out — the supple and subtle rubberband-bass tones on “Stuck Together Pieces,” for example — they sound fantastic. But they also sound like loops, like the precisely-calibrated work of a machine too sophisticated to exist for another couple of years yet.

AMOK, then, is very much Yorke’s project. And like The Eraser before it, it seems soft and minor, almost by design. Yorke sings everything in a mutter or a coo or a mutter-coo, and you need a lyric sheet to decipher words that, it turns out, are all diffuse meditations on disconnection anyway. The music is content to ripple and sputter deep in the background, to add strange new shades to your day rather than to recolor it completely. And the whole thing sounds immeasurably better on decent headphones than on speakers, exactly as you’d imagine. York piles on layers of his own voice until he sounds like an impossibly sad swarm of bees, or he buries himself in blankets of synth-drum-bass until he’s practically a ghost of himself. Even on The King Of Limbs, Radiohead would occasionally offer up something resembling a tangible, conventional rock guitar riff; Yorke never turns out anything like that here. Rather than songs, he mostly gives us tones and textures and densely knotty grooves.

And yet AMOK doesn’t sound the slightest bit difficult or impenetrable. It’s a mellow, inviting sigh of a listen. Those rhythms are all unfailingly tricky and cerebral, but there’s a comfort in them too, especially since the individual sounds that the band layers up are so sharp and clear and wonderfully recorded. It’s all mastered so that you can pick out every ripple of drum or synth on headphones, so that each new element the band piles on has enough room to make its presence felt. Nearly every sound on the record is soft and pillowy, none more so than Yorke’s voice. Over and over, that voice seems to wander into transcendent flights of melody, as if by accident. If Yorke wanted, he could probably still write straight-up rock songs that would knock the collective lot of us dead. Instead, he’s given us this itchy and introverted but compulsively listenable bit of beat-warping. I’ll take it.

“Compulsively listenable” is the best way I’ve heard to describe this so far – it’s great, but pretty laid back about it (and, I think purposefully homogeneous). AMOK is one of my favorite songs of the last few years.

Not sure if I can get on board with Thom Yorke being a musical version of Steven Soderbergh.
Don’t think Soderbergh has made, or ever will make, anything that has affected film in the way that some of Radiohead’s albums have affected music.

I don’t know about that. ‘sex, lies and videotape’ was very much the template for 90s American indie film. ‘Traffic’ might be the platonic ideal of a wide scope omnibus ‘issue’ movie; ‘Erin Brockovich’ is one of the great ‘based on a true story’ procedurals . ‘Ocean’s Eleven’ could be the most enjoyable heist movie ever made that is actually about the heist itself. And ‘Solaris’ has to be the most far-out studio picture made since Stanley Kubrick died. Interestingly, all of those (other than s,l & v) more or less coincide with Radiohead’s 1997-2001 heyday.

I suppose it depends what you consider “good” songwriting. I think Thom still writes incredibly interesting and relevant music. Stuff like this and The Eraser are obviously less melodic or verse-chorus driven than usual Radiohead. But like Tom mentioned in the article, it’s not that Yorke can’t, it’s that he simply doesn’t write those kind of songs. While I’ll always enjoy a melodic opus like Weird Fishes more, I don’t fault him for these experiments, nor do I think its a sign of inability to write such songs.

And I’ll have to strongly disagree with the claim that King of Limbs doesn’t have good songwriting. It follows the AMOK/The Eraser formula a bit more, where groove and texture outweigh melody and typical song structure, but songs like Give Up The Ghost? Codex? Lotus Flower? Those are among Radiohead’s greatest achievements in my opinion.

In my humble opinion, I weary of Thom Yorke’s continual reliance on electronics, cut up loops, electronic tid bits run amuck. I miss the simplicity and beauty of his heart aching songwriting from the past…where the songs were defined and designed that they could be performed with a full on band or on a guitar. Sure the sonic textures are interesting, polished, well groomed and well crafted in the studio, but my contention is that it has become an almost obsessive creative backdrop for him. And that stretches to the latest in the Radiohead canon with King of Limbs. I never cared for The Eraser. I never cared for Hail to the Thief or even much of Amnesiac. I feel that this record is kind of an extension of those albums. So sonically over-driven and cluttered with electronic proceedings, that melodic breathing room and beauty get lost in a cyber shuffle. But, I can still love the fusion of sonics with MELODY. Something that truly stirs the soul beyond the feeling of an aural/musical equivalent of thx-1138. Youtube any solo Yorke performance on acoustic guitar and some of you may get what I feel he’s missing currently. I don’t mean to bash this record; it is still an artform and well sculpted sonically….but it feels in a way contrived, devoid of real feeling. Kid A was the sound of the Ghost in the haunted machine and regardless of how obtuse it could seem, it had a pulse. This record ( and in part, The King of Limbs) sounds like the machine in the ghost. It just doesn’t do anything for me. I can appreciate the witty, ear candy that is the production, but beyond that, naught. Still a fan of artists own tastes and how they choose to reflect that with the progression of their art, but…..

I disagree with you on a purely ‘taste’ level – I really enjoyed The Eraser, KoL, and AMOK – but tastes are tastes. Beyond that, I think that Yorke is feeling his way through these new sounds and the technologies that offer them (and are always changing) to find the best way to express the great melodies he’s always been able to conjur in the best and most expressive way. ie: he’s searching for warmth inside of these inherently cold pathways. It’s arguable whether or not he’s been succeeding (I would argue that he has been, it seems like you would argue the opposite), but songs like “Bloom,” “The Seperator,” “Before Your Very Eyes,” and “Amok” I think are clear indicators that there’s plenty of ‘heart&soul’ melodies to be mined, and that he’s at least on the right track. Again though, I love it all (except for maybe Feral).

And thats why Mr. Michael J Fox avatar its always good to hear a fair and balanced fellow Radiohead fan’s side and alternate perspective. That’s how I began to really get into Kid A after an alienating first listen. :) Can’t say AMOK will do the very same for me, but I do my best to really be open minded. I shall try again with this album, albeit with better headphones as the gummys above have suggested ;)

Aw really?? I love Feral! In fact, I was going to say Feral is the closest track on KoL to what is going on in AMOK.

Anyway, I agree with your response. I see where Luke is coming from, but I think it is a taste thing. Makes sense that people wouldn’t enjoy these detours, especially if they don’t appreciate albums like Amnesiac and HTTT. Thom is experimenting with a genre and style that wouldn’t fit on a Radiohead record (some would argue KoL is that style, and while it has those elements, it is very much a full band effort…especially after having seen them live on that tour). Some don’t appreciate that sound, and that’s fine. I happen to love this type of music and think Thom pulls it off exceptionally well. If I wanted a melodic epic I wouldn’t go for AMOK or The Eraser, but then again that’s not why I listen this type of music anyway. It makes sense when you think of the type of DJ artists Thom is really into, particularly Flying Lotus and the like. It’s just a different thing he’s trying out. I don’t expect it to sound like Radiohead, and I’m not let down that it doesn’t.

To me Bloom is the closest KoL track to AMOK in both sound and general tone. I found Feral to be a bit cold, but to be honest I never really gave it a fair shake.

I do agree that the whole “new Yorke vs. old Yorke” debate comes down purely and simply to taste – Yorke (and Radiohead, by extension) have chosen to explore minimalism, inorganic sounds and nuance, I assume, as a contrast to the bombast and raw organic nature of their earlier years. Those who prefer bombast and organic instruments will inevitably prefer the earlier stuff. I tend to be pretty back and forth in terms of preferring organic vs. electronic sounds, so this may just be hitting me at the right moment, or I trust Yorke and co. so much that I’m willing to dive in no matter what. AMOK certainly sounds closest to Flying Lotus – especially his collab with Thom “and the world laughs with you.”

Yeah, I see Bloom in there too. When I saw them live, I bought a shirt that said “Feral” on it, haha. Love that one.

Haha “new Yorke.” So obviously awesome. And I totally agree. I love both sides so much it just depends on my mood, really. He/they pull off both so well. And Ialso think they mix the two seamlessly on occasion. There’s a Yorke for every sensation. (<- half-assed attempt to tie in York peppermint patties.)

Yes anonymous downvoter, they do both have valid points. True fans enjoy what they accomplished in the past that is the highest watermark for the full expression of their genius and others are caught in the great divide between wanting the artist to fully express themselves progressively regardless if it alienates fans from feeling that they are turning about face from their past glories. Yes I write in paragraphs.

Did you by chance see them on the King of Limbs tour? Because that was about as epically arena ready as I’ve ever seen a band. They haven’t lost a step since the Bends, in my opinion. Different sounds and approaches sure, but every bit as epic.

king of limbs live is a religious experience. that tour, in my experience, was head and shoulders above the HTTT and In Rainbows tour. seeing the KOL songs played live gave me an even greater appreciation of the songs. it was the 3rd time Radiohead took body of work that shouldn’t work as well live as it does and making it sound even better than the record.

Totally agree. It’s not everybody’s luxury to see them live, obviously. But I kind of think that’s why King of Limbs went over a few heads. It’s one of those that almost HAS to be seen live. So glorious.

This album sounds exactly like what it is: It’s Thom Yorke doing his electronic thing, which isn’t particularly interesting or breaking any new ground, and it’s also a band that stated they recorded this entire thing as essentially one big jam session that they cut and pasted into “songs.” There isn’t much cohesion here, there isn’t really any type of real vision or structure. It’s a bunch of mildly interesting grooves, hooks, and bleep blorps pieced together, and you can tell. It’s fine, but as someone else said, it is mostly forgettable.

It’s also somewhat of a shame to have such a talented group of musicians essentially try their hardest to sound like they aren’t playing actual instruments.

Seanjean, as much as I adore Thom Yorke’s gifts and that goes for the whole of the band, I totally agree with you. I know Radiohead are a type of sacred cow and that any offspring of Yorke’s can be a hit or miss affair, I just hope listeners realize that sonic fantasia doesn’t always equal great art. You can have Godrich behind the boards or Brian Eno but if the songwriting is just not there ( on this record it isn’t IMHO), then you can’t hide behind sonic/electronic gimmicks to compensate for lack of inspired songwriting. A lot of people on this board talk about how great it sounds on hi-def headphones and that’s exactly my point. Its a FUN listen; alot of cool studio trickery and the whole bit. But on a song to song basis, I just feel its a big empty shiny void. And I had high hopes for this album. Especially considering the high caliber of talent involved. On a side note, Radiohead may never be 93-’97 Era Radiohead again. But I found The King of Limbs to be so entrenched in the mode of almost anti-songwriting that its a great sounding but completely tuneless record. I wish Thom Yorke would listen to The Beatles again. He is SO talented when he gets it right. Melody is so vital to a song unless you find a way to do something that hasn’t been done before and not make it sound insipid or boring. It’s like I’ve already heard ‘Amok” before in various incarnations of Yorke’s other collaborations and or latest material with Radiohead and I just can’t stand it. Long time Radiohead/Thom Yorke fan rant over.

The problem with this point of view is, Thom Yorke ISN’T listening to the Beatles. He’s listening to Flying Lotus and other similar DJ’s and electronic artists. It’s simply his attempt at a similar aesthetic. Flying Lotus doesn’t write melodic epics either, his tracks are for the appreciation of groove and texture. Sometimes the point of music is not to have this gorgeous melody to guide you into enjoyment., but to explore the boundaries of sound itself. It’s understandable some don’t like that type of music, and you obviously don’t appreciate it, or at least Thom’s approach to it. But I kind of find it unfair to expect anything Thom is associated with to sound like Radiohead (or at least older Radiohead). An artists intentions definitely have to be taken into account. It’s not that he has failed to write a great melody, he simply has no interest in that here.
Again, I understand where you are coming from, I don’t want to be confrontational. It makes sense to me when people don’t enjoy this. But I think it comes down to taste. If you disliked Amnesiac and Hail to the Thief, then of course you don’t like stuff like this. I just think it’s unfair to somehow blame it on Thom, as if he’s failed to entertain you. I think it’s safe to say you are not his audience with something like this.

I agree with this viewpoint in that I realize this likely isn’t for me and I also understand my reasons for not liking it probably aren’t the goals of the project to begin with. That being said, I freaking love Amnesiac and Hail to the Thief, and this album has very little in common with either of them, both in terms of quality or style.

I agree. I don’t think those albums sound anything like this, but I can see why one who is turned off to those albums would also not like AMOK, especially if their reasoning for not liking them was because of the abrasive electronica.
But I also freaking love them.

KidChair, you make good points. I like Aphex Twin and I know thats different then this stuff, but thats not exactly melodic. I think its the style as well that I don’t like via this record or his recent output ( Yorkes, not AT).

Thom can obviously make whatever kind of music he wants, but I would argue that this style just isn’t really his strong suit. Not a matter of taste, at least for me, since I love Flying Lotus, Teebs, Burial, Aphex Twin, and other “textural” beatmakers, but I just can’t get into this. It doesn’t have the sense of space and wonder that FlyLo and Teebs have, it doesn’t have the pathos and atmosphere of Burial, or the spastic, aggressive menace of Aphex Twin. It just sounds like a bunch of clattering and burbling.

To be fair, I haven’t given the full thing a listen on quality headphones. So my opinion could change.

Yeah, I can respect that. I would usually take FlyLo and Aphex Twin over this too. But I do suggest a headphones listen. After a few listens this thing has really grown on me.

I mentioned this below, but I wonder how people would respond if Thom omitted the vocals altogether? All of these artists we’re comparing it to are mostly instrumental. It makes me wonder if that juxtaposition of vocals and glitch electronica turn some people off. Any insight, as someone who doesn’t really care for it? Would you appreciate this more as an instrumental album?

I listen to and love a lot of electronic music, including Flying Lotus and especially Aphex Twin, but I do not understand the esteem that Burial is held in. To me it sounds like I am listening to late-1980s top 40 dance music from the bottom of a swimming pool (either I am at the bottom of said pool doing the listening or Expose or Stacy Q or whomever it is is at the bottom of the pool singing and I am standing at the foot of the deep end politely listening; either way I don’t hear what all the fuss is about).

Yeah, the second half of KoL (Lotus Flower – Seperator) is just about my favorite sequence of Radiohead songs ever. I don’t know what it is, but I find the guitar lick in Seperator to be downright fucking awesome.

I would say Codex and Give up the Ghost are the best of the lot on that record. I just can’t appreciate King Of Limbs. Its the only Radiohead album I never bothered to buy :( Love this band so much but was just bored by KOL.

Most Viewed

The Doors are part of a very specific category of classic-rock artists: the gateway artists. The bands that — assuming you weren’t around in the ’60s — are amongst the first names you explore when you start digging into pop music’s past. Though keyboardist Ray Manzarek, guitarist Robby Krieger, and drummer John Densmore were all… More »

Last night, U2 played the seventh night of an eight-night stand at Madison Square Garden. (Our own young classic rocker Ryan Leas reviewed one of those shows earlier in the week.) And at last night’s show, the band introduced a few special local guests. There was New York royalty Paul Simon, who came out to… More »

After reportedly showing up half an hour late, rapper Travi$ Scott got his Lollapalooza set shut down after only 5 minutes by encouraging fans to jump the security barrier and rush the stage. Festival organizers deemed the resulting chaos to be unsafe and shut the whole thing down, with security forcibly removing Scott from the… More »

Morrissey often uses his True To You website to write about cases of what he considers to be societal injustice, as he did in the recent post blasting the killer of Cecil the lion. But as Pitchfork points out, Morrissey’s latest post for the site details a much more personal violation. Morrissey writes that, a… More »

Eminem is a pretty fit dude — for a while, he was even attached to star in Antoine Fuqua’s new boxing movie Southpaw. So how does Eminem stay a pretty fit dude? By working out compulsively. And in a new article on Men’s Journal, the rapper details his compulsive exercise regimen. “In the early days,”… More »

Lollapalooza takes place this weekend in Chicago, and most of the sets from the festival will be livestreaming via Red Bull TV in case you can’t (or don’t want to) leave the comfort of your own home. Some of the acts performing this weekend include Paul McCartney (with a highlights-only set streaming), Metallica, the Weeknd,… More »

Superproducer Mark Ronson stopped by for a live in-studio session at Australian radio station Triple J today. As usual, he assembled a crack team of musicians to back him up, including Tame Impala’s Kevin Parker and Kirin J. Callinan on guitar. The band performed a great psyched-out cover of Queens Of The Stone Age’s “I… More »

Drake has already released not one but two diss tracks in response to Meek Mill’s ghostwriting allegations. After Funkmaster Flex promised a Meek response track Monday night on Hot 97 and failed to deliver, people were pissed, and everyone began to wonder if this mega-beef were already over. But no — the soap opera continues! More »